Members of the have vowed to keep up their efforts to retain as municipal property after a financial crunch and calls from the former transition chairman for Mayor Daryl Finizio renewed fears that the property could be sold to the .
Finizio called a special City Council meeting on Friday “to discuss the potential purchase and sale of real estate by the city of New London.” The meeting was cancelled due to concerns over whether it would violate the Freedom of Information Act, but Finizio met individually with councilors before announcing that New London faces a .
Finizio said the methods to address the budget crunch could include selling city assets, but referred to his past position on Riverside Park when asked if the property was under consideration. During his campaign, Finizio was opposed to the proposed sale of about half of the 18-acre park to the Coast Guard Academy for $2.9 million.
The question went before voters at the November ballot, and was defeated in a close vote after a .
Calls from de Vars
Ronna Stuller and Kathleen Mitchell, members of the Friends of Riverside Conservancy, each said they received a phone call before the meeting from Allyn de Vars, who prior to Finizio taking office. de Vars is no longer employed by Finizio, but said the mayor sometimes consults with him on issues.
“I’m still not really sure whether he was acting on behalf of the mayor, if he knew me and wanted to put out feelers about the option of using Riverside Park as a means to resolve the budget crisis,” said Stuller. “I think he did want to assure me that the budget crisis is real, and I’m not one of the people that doubts this.”
Stuller said their discussion included talk about the budget situation, and that she concluded from the conversation that the sale of Riverside Park is under consideration since the academy is a known potential buyer.
“He definitely presented it as a possible option, and I think in part he was seeking other opinions and other options,” said Stuller. "But the idea of selling the park for obviously a lot more than $2.9 million was one of the things that was being considered.”
Mitchell said de Vars discussed the budget situation with her, and she told him she had heard one offer from the academy would give $5 million to the city as well as the promise that the national Coast Guard museum would be located in New London. She said de Vars responded, “Try $15 million.”
“He made no bones about it when he called me that he was calling for the mayor,” said Mitchell.
Response from de Vars
de Vars said he has known Finizio, Mitchell, and Stuller since about 2005. He said the calls were personal rather than on behalf of the mayor, and that he made them to assuage concerns regarding Riverside Park. de Vars said he had also noticed that Mitchell had started posting about the park in online forums following the announcement of its meeting.
“It’s just the way she operates she goes out she beats on the drum really hard and my intentions there were just saying, ‘Hey, wait until the whole picture comes out,’” he said.
de Vars said the discussion of a sales price was more theoretical, and that Mitchell said the conservancy considers that the park is not for sale at any price. He said Finizio has said publicly and privately that his position on the park has not changed, and recalled that Finizio had stated prior to taking office that he considered the initial tally supporting the sale moot because the .
“We fought like hell to support the park during his campaign and it’s not his desire to put that park up for sale,” said de Vars.
Wednesday meeting
“I think that the mayor probably meant during his campaign that he didn’t want to sell Riverside Park, but he may not have realized the reality of the situation,” said Mitchell.
Mitchell said she thinks Finizio is under pressure from the academy and other officials to make the sale, and is considering whether to ask a City Council subcommittee to investigate the academy’s connection with municipal affairs. She said she also believes the academy has enough room to meet its expansion needs on campus and that the conservancy remains committed to retaining the park.
“We will go to any lengths to save that park,” said Mitchell.
Stuller said the conservancy was organized as an open space group to maintain and renovate the park, but would renew its political efforts if a sale is announced. She said the conservancy may have a statement on the matter after its regular meeting on Wednesday.
“My view was what it’s always been: that the park can’t be on the table,” said Stuller. “I don’t think it will solve the budget issue even in the short run. It would be a huge breach of trust to the mayor’s supporters.”
Note: a blog from Kathleen Mitchell regarding Riverside Park will post at 10:30 a.m. this morning.
Now please humor me and act like the intelligent adults I'm pretty sure you all are. That means no name-calling, no dirty tricks, and a reasonable discussion about the issues. I shouldn't have to keep saying this. Thank you.
Please, let's focus on sharin g information and moving forward in am effort to solve this problem rather than creating more out of thin air
Moving the stadium sounds like a reasonable thing to me. Speaking with Conn College about hosting the child care center on their campus rather than keeping it on the CGA grounds sounds reasonable, too. Nixing Robert Crown Park on the CGA grounds also sounds like a good idea. Investigating the feasibility of putting an additional deck on top of Roland Hall sounds pretty rational. Tell me John, how much space would those four changes free up on the Academy grounds? It seems to me that none of those things would disrupt or inconvenience cadet life on campus. And, it would make more efficient use of their campus.
Although the Academy hoped to purchase 9 acres of Riverside Park, the footprint of the planned buildings wasn't much more than an acre or two. The rest of the property was to become a buffer zone for security reasons, necessary because of the expansion of the Coast Guard into new territory. That wouldn't be needed on the current football field site, since it is already a secure location. Many people (especially if they do not live in New London) seem to have the idea that New Londoners are selfish because we don't want to "share" our land with the CGA. But the current 110 acre campus was largely a gift from the city to the Coast Guard (in 1961); more land was willingly sold for expansion in the 1960s and some was taken from our city by eminent domain. We have been more than generous with our land in the past, and we just can't afford to lose any more.
A simple Google search or one on The Day will show you the error of that statement alone.
Contrary to your conclusion, selling off yet another piece of the park would be highly irresponsible. Those debts you wish to retire through the sale will crop up again and again. Yet, that land will be gone forever. BTW, NL already sold HALF of the park to the CGA years ago (and the land is never coming back to NL. Where is the money from that sale now?). Yes, by all means the city and the CGA should sit down together and discuss ways for their mutual needs to be met. In those discussions the mayor should firmly state to the CG that Riverside is not for sale. However, if the CGA would like assistance from NL in how else it can deal with its space needs he will offer all the help he can.
My views on the park are still kind of up in the air. It feels like I understand and support both decisions... It's actually kind of frustrating for me. However, at the time of the vote, I voted to Save the Park, not because I was actually confident that's what I wanted, but more so because of the insulting sales price. So again... I wonder how different the vote would have been if it was set at close to $15 million.